Skeleton to add Appendix B for Challenge #4; Also removed SC 1.3.5 fr…

…om Challenge #4.

conformance-challenges/index.html

@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ <h2>Challenge #1: Scaling Conformance Verification</h2>
 HTML markup can be automatically validated to confirm that it is used according to specification, but a human is required to verify whether the HTML elements used correctly reflect the meaning of the content. For example, text on a web page marked contained in a paragraph element may not trigger any failure in an automated test, nor would an image with alternative text  equal to "red, white, and blue bird", but a human will identify that the text needs to be enclosed in a heading element to reflect the actual use on the page, and also that the proper alternative text for the image is "American Airlines logo". Many existing accessibility success criteria expect informed human evaluation to ensure that the end users benefit from conformance.
 	    The same can be said of very large web-based applications that are developed in an agile manner with updates delivered in rapid succession, often on an hourly basis.</p>
             <p>We can think of this as the distinction between quantitative and qualitative analysis. We know how to automatically test for and count the occurrences of relevant markup. However, we do not yet know how to automatically verify the quality of what that markup conveys to the user. In the case of adjudging appropriate quality, informed human review is still required.</p>
-            <p>The Appendix to this document describes challenges with applying the WCAG 2.x conformance model to specific Guidelines and Success Criteria.</p>
+            <p>Appendix A below describes challenges with applying the WCAG 2.x conformance model to specific Guidelines and Success Criteria.</p>
         </section>
         <section>
             <h2>Challenge #2: Large, complex, and dynamic websites may have too many changing permutations to validate effectively</h2>
@@ -93,15 +93,7 @@ <h3>Treatment of 3rd party content and Statements of Partial Conformance</h3>
         <section>
             <h2>Challenge #4: Non-Web Information and Communications Technologies </h2>
             <p>The core principles, and many of the guidelines, contained in WCAG 2.x, are broadly applicable outside of the web context.  For example, no matter the technology, information presented to humans needs to be perceivable by them in order for them to access and use it.  At the same time, some of the specific guidelines and especially some of the individual success criteria of WCAG 2.x are written specifically for web content and web technologies, and may be difficult to apply to non-web information and communications technologies (as set forth in the Working Group Note “<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/">Applying WCAG to Non-Web Information and Communication Technologies</a>” or “WCAG2ICT”).  A number of entities looking to apply WCAG 2.x to non-web ICT have made use of the guidance in WCAG2ICT when drafting regulations and requirements in their contexts and countries.</p>
-            <p>Some of the specific Success Criteria pose specific challenges in the WCAG2ICT context.</p>
-            <section>
-<h3>Identify Input Purpose
-</h3>
-<p class="sc-link">
-	<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#identify-input-purpose">Success Criterion 1.3.5</a>
-</p>
-                <p>This Success Criterion specifies that an input field’s purpose must be “identified in the <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#input-purposes">Input Purposes for User Interface Components section</a>” of WCAG 2.x.  Unfortunately, few if any operating systems or platforms have the same or an equivalent definition of input components that can be conveyed to assistive technologies [add reference to Yet Another Accessibility API Mapping project here].</p>
-            </section>
+            <p>Some of the specific Success Criteria pose specific challenges in the WCAG2ICT context and have been adopted by specifications such as the European Union's EN301549. An initial listing is provided in Appendix B below.</p>
         </section>
         <section>
             <h2>Challenges of Conformance as identified from Silver Research</h2>
@@ -192,7 +184,7 @@ <h4>Evolving Technology</h4>
             </section>
         </section>
 	<section>
-		<h2>Appendix: Enumerated Challenges With WCAG 2.X Success Criteria</h2>
+		<h2>Appendix A: Enumerated Challenges With WCAG 2.X Success Criteria</h2>
             <p>This (growing) section describes challenges with applying the WCAG 2.x conformance model to specific Guidelines and Success Criteria, primarily based on required human involvement in evaluation of conformance to them. In this draft, the list is not  exhaustive, but we intend it to cover all known challenges with at least all A and AA Success Criteria, by the time this Note is completed.</p>
             <section>
 <h3>Text Alternatives for Non-Text Content</h3>
@@ -531,6 +523,10 @@ <h3>Name, Role, Value
                 <p>Incorrect use of ARIA constructs can be detected automatically but constructs that appear correct may still not work, and widgets that have NO Aria (but need it to be understood) can go undetected. Human post-check of automatic checks is still necessary.</p>
             </section>
 	</section>
+
+	<section>
+		<h2>Appendix B: Enumerated Challenges Applying WCAG to Non-Web ICT</h2>
+		</section
         <section>
             <h1>Terms</h1>
 			<p>The following terms are used in this document:</p>